In an ongoing exchange on the Great Nicobar Island (GNI) project, environment minister Bhupender Yadav has told Congress MP Jairam Ramesh that concerns on baseline studies, biodiversity conservation, and erosion at Galathea Bay have “already been addressed”, even as Ramesh, in a fresh letter, flagged that reports on compliance and wildlife mitigation are not publicly available.
The GNI project, spread over 166 sq km and featuring a transhipment container port, an international military-civilian use airport, power infrastructure, and a greenfield coastal city, will require the felling of 13,000 hectares of pristine forest on the ecologically sensitive islands.
Yadav and Ramesh’s latest round of correspondence began on May 10, when the MP slammed the environment impact assessment study for the project’s clearance as an “insult to science and a mockery” of the project appraisal process.
Yadav had rejected the pointed allegations that legally mandated adequate baseline studies were not carried out, and had asserted in a May 27 letter that Ramesh’s concerns were examined through a statutory appraisal process and a judicially mandated review.
In his latest response on June 13, Yadav said that issues related to the environmental appraisal, the adequacy of studies, and ecological safeguards or compliance with coastal regulation have already been duly examined and appraised by the concerned expert appraisal committee with the rigour required for such an appraisal.
He also referred to a February 16 National Green Tribunal order and said that the tribunal had “duly considered” issues on erosion at Galathea Bay and the confidentiality of a high-powered committee report which revisited the project’s clearance.
“The Tribunal has also duly examined the environmental, forest and coastal regulation zone clearances in detail as also the environmental safeguards and appropriate mitigation, monitoring and management measures,” he said.
In response, Ramesh raised fresh concerns in a June 19 letter that reports on compliance with a slew of environmental clearance conditions, as well as conservation and mitigation plans on wildlife and biodiversity, have not been made available publicly.
He pointed out that six-monthly compliance reports, which are to be submitted to show compliance with specific conditions laid down in an environmental clearance, have not been made public since March 2024. He also highlighted that institutions tasked with the mitigation of the project’s environmental impact have not made the conservation and mitigation plans public.
These refer to biodiversity and wildlife mitigation and conservation plans on coral conservation, Nicobar megapode, saltwater crocodiles, forest management, and other endemic fauna.
“Moreover, it is strange, to say the least, that such plans may have been submitted after appraisal by the committee concerned, raising doubts about their adequacy and reliability,” Ramesh said.
He also termed the mitigation plan to relocate coral colonies as “clearly unrealistic and almost impossible.” Ramesh reasoned that the reports he has asked to be made publicly available “in no way come in the way of fulfilling so-called strategic objectives which has now become the rationale for the Great Nicobar Island project.”
